The Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) networks have colluded with the Obama administration to censor the latest IRS scandal news. The latest: On September 17 Paul Bedard of the Washington Examiner reported the following: An ongoing House Ways and Means Committee probe of the IRS scandal has uncovered proof that the agency demanded donor lists almost exclusively from conservative groups and could make them public despite promises to destroy the sensitive tallies of contributors.

Committee officials told Secrets that of the 27 groups forced to cough up donor lists, 24 were conservative, nearly double the number suggested previously by IRS management. At a recent committee hearing, former acting Internal Revenue Service boss Steven Miller said that a majority of the requests were to non-Tea Party groups.

Bedard went on to report: Previously, Democrats have suggested that progressive groups were targeted in similar numbers. The IRS had pledged to the committee to destroy the donor lists, which were improperly requested. If kept in the files, they become public. However, the committee told Secrets that in the 300,000 pages its reviewed so far, donor lists remain in some of the case files of the groups. That will become part of the public record, said a committee official. ABC, CBS and NBC have yet to report this story.

Last Time Any Aspect of the IRS Scandals Was Mentioned on Big Three Morning and Evening Shows:

ABC - June 26 (86 days)

CBS - July 24 (57 days)

NBC - June 27 (85 days)

The following is a list of key developments in the IRS scandal and how many days it has been since they were discussed, if at all, by the Big Three on their morning and evening news shows:

On September 18 the USA Today, in a front page story, reported the following: Newly uncovered IRS documents show the agency flagged political groups based on the content of their literature, raising concerns specifically about anti-Obama rhetoric, inflammatory language and emotional statements made by non-profits seeking tax-exempt status.

The internal 2011 documents, obtained by USA TODAY, list 162 groups by name, with comments by Internal Revenue Service lawyers in Washington raising issues about their political, lobbying and advocacy activities. In 21 cases, those activities were characterized as propaganda. The list provides the most specific public accounting to date of which groups were targeted for extra scrutiny and why. The IRS has not publicly identified the groups, repeatedly citing a provision of the tax code prohibiting it from releasing tax return information.

The article by Gregory Korte went on to report: The American Center for Law and Justice, a nonprofit legal institute that represents 33 of the groups appearing on the IRS list, said it appears to be the most powerful evidence yet of a coordinated effort by the IRS to target Tea Party groups. The political motivations of this are so patently obvious, but then to have a document that spells it out like this is very damaging to the IRS, said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the ACLJ. I hope the FBI has seen these documents.

Number of days with NO network story: 2

Lerners Official IRS Scandal Storyline Undercut by Newly Released E-Mails

On September 11 the Wall Street Journals editorial page, in an article headlined Lois Lerners Own Words, reported the following: In a February 2011 email, Ms. Lerner advised her staffincluding then Exempt Organizations Technical Manager Michael Seto and then Rulings and Agreements director Holly Pazthat a Tea Party matter is very dangerous, and is something Counsel and [Lerner adviser] Judy Kindell need to be in on. Ms. Lerner adds, Cincy should probably NOT have these cases.

Thats a different tune than the IRS sang in May when former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said the agencys overzealous enforcement was the work of two rogue employees in Cincinnati. When the story broke, Ms. Lerner suggested that her office had been unaware of the pattern of targeting until she read about it in the newspaper. So it was pretty much we started seeing information in the press that raised questions for us, and we went back and took a look, she said in May.

The WSJ Review & Outlook piece went on to note: Earlier this summer, IRS lawyer Carter Hull, who oversaw the review of many Tea Party cases and questionnaires, testified that his oversight began in April 2010. Tea party cases under review are being supervised by Chip Hull at each step, Ms. Paz wrote to Ms. Lerner in a February 2011 email. He reviews info from TPs, correspondence to TPs etc. No decisions are going out of Cincy until we go all the way through the process with the c3 and c4 cases here. TP stands for Tea Party, and she means 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) nonprofit groups.

Let’s say in 2016 we do get a conservative President. The Press has run roughshod over every republican President since I was of voting age. Now they have gotten so good at their propaganda that they can bring to ruins anyone they care to target, they can stop any President’s agenda, and they can sway public opinion with a twist of the word, heck that can change the literal cultural meaning of words by having some celebrity redefine it on a talk show!

In a land of Free Speech and Freedom of the Press how does one go about stopping the propaganda? Is stopping propaganda an infringement of Rights? Is ‘propaganda’ like shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre?

The Press has always had the power to hold tyranny in place or be the power to break the hold of tyranny. The fact that the legislative body is working to legally define who a journalist is, means the big networks have lobbied to protect their propaganda and the agenda. I point to the use of the phrase ‘citizen journalist.’ A simple turn of the phrase to discount a Freeman’s reporting, thoughts, perceptions, and opinions has essentially infringed and discredited you!

Our country was founded on such Freemen using the printing press to educate the citizenry and was also a form of propaganda against the king. Consider today you cannot stand on the corner without a permit and handout pamphlets. Heck, you can’t hand out the Constitution on Constitution Day!

Using the internet has one being monitored for every keystroke, even our email and phone calls are essentially tapped. As a ‘citizen journalist,’ our Right to Free Speech and Free Press is already infringed by means of the chilling effect. Consider for a moment that even here on FR many are very careful in how they express themselves. Even the owner of the site has issued statements like this:

So I return to my question that started this post and rephrase it. What is a Freeman to do to restore their Right to Freedom of the Press, crush the propaganda, and destroy the censorship that is big media today? A Freeman exercising his Rights of Speech and Press is big media’s and the government’s biggest fear. A Freeman’s Press that finds a way to circumvent their controls over the message, speech, and education of the public will be the Press’s downfall.

We must find a way to break the hold of information censorship the media and government holds before 2016. If the Patriots prior to 1776 could find a way, we owe it to them, ourselves, and our children to find a way today.

“The Press has run roughshod over every republican President since I was of voting age.”

Reagan though was a master at communications and talking directly to the people over the press. His White House was effective in determining the message for the day and getting Republicans to stay on message. Plus he had a great sense of humor and was effective in using it to point out the lunacy of many liberal positions. He had core beliefs and was confident in sticking with them as well as promoting them. Plus he loved the nation and its people and most of the people understood the interests of the US were its first priority.

I’ve come to the conclusion that both Bush’s were global elitists and pragmatic politicians first. Despite their claims to be conservatives, they were politicians first. They were preoccupied with the administration of government instead of passionate leadership of a cause. Compromise and capitulation were the result. While George W. connected with the American people immediately after 9/11 he blew the good will he developed by failing to sustain his relationship with the people and allowing his opposition and the media to define events. Bush failed to fight back against his detractors which is a huge failure of leadership which ultimately allowed his opposition to successfully to portray him as a loser and a failure.

Notice that while the mainstream press carries Obama’s water he doesn’t always use them to carry his message. He effectively uses social media, second parties (i.e. celebrities and activists with access to the media such as Sharpton), non-profit cause groups such as Planned Parenthood and the Sierra Club, personal appearances, the federal bureaucracy, and orchestrated “news” to communicate his message and demagogue Republicans. The White House understands how to manage the message effectively (i.e. propaganda). The Republican presidents since Reagan have not understood how to manage the message.

Ultimately I believe Republican Presidents (Reagan the exception) have failed to communicate effectively with the nation because they lacked steadfast believe in the American people. Nixon, Ford, and the two Bush Presidents wanted to govern, not to reduce the burden of government on the people. They lacked a vision for American and therefore were preoccupied with managing issues and the daily administrative aspects of the politics of government.

Both Reagan and Obama were/are on missions. Reagan wanted to downsize the federal government and move most governing to the states and localities. He also believed in free markets and the potential of self reliant individual human beings operating in a free market without the heavy hand of government. Obama is the anti Reagan desiring a strong central government and a redistributionist socialist economy. To Obama “group” are more important than individuals. In fact instead of the empowering individuals through limited government, Obama seeks to empower groups by bestowing on them government privileges and money.

Both Obama and Reagan had clear visions for American and understood the need to effectively communicate with the people in order to use government to advance their visions. Neither compromised their core principles and as a result accomplished much more in advancing their agendas than they would have in compromising. The other Republican Presidents failed because they lacked vision. Without a vision there is no leadership. Without leadership and vision it is easy for the press and the opposition to define you.

Had either McCain or Romney been elected President, they would have failed. While both claimed to be conservatives, neither were passionate about conservative values or anything else. They would have failed the test of leadership and chewed up by the press and the political opposition. Pragmatic politicians almost always fail when placed in leadership positions. True committed visionaries usually succeed because they don’t compromise.

9
posted on 09/21/2013 4:31:31 AM PDT
by Soul of the South
(Yesterday is gone. Today will be what we make of it.)

You make a good point regarding Reagan, but we missed the boat even with Reagan. We failed to maintain that core communication and vision of purpose after he left office. Our country can’t sit around and wait for another Reagan, the mantel of freedom has fallen on us and we have to choose what we will do and we have to figure out a way to get the message out with credibility.

I submit that for all the reasons you stated Reagan did succeed, but he still failed to turn back the liberal progressive tide. The wave of progressivism still rolled in like a tsunami after Reagan left office. Reagan left the country and the world overall a better place and little can be said about the impact of his missteps and yet, big media destroyed what should have been an ongoing vision and legacy for generations of Americans to come.

Reagan is gone now and we need to stop looking for him. We carry with us a vision and it is now up to us to put a physical purpose to the vision. And I submit that is comes in the form of taking back the Freemans Freedom of the Press to educate the public.

Rush Limbaugh disdainfully refers to ‘low information voters.’ He started using the phrase OK, but now he says it with near slander in his tone. His use offends me as this is exactly the voter to which we need to restore the American dream too. You can’t do that if you don’t hold respect for them as a freeman.

10
posted on 09/21/2013 5:15:56 AM PDT
by EBH
( Freeman: A person not in slavery or serfdom.)

So I return to my question that started this post and rephrase it. What is a Freeman to do to restore their Right to Freedom of the Press, crush the propaganda, and destroy the censorship that is big media today? A Freeman exercising his Rights of Speech and Press is big medias and the governments biggest fear. A Freemans Press that finds a way to circumvent their controls over the message, speech, and education of the public will be the Presss downfall. We must find a way to break the hold of information censorship the media and government holds before 2016. If the Patriots prior to 1776 could find a way, we owe it to them, ourselves, and our children to find a way today.

The most important thing to do is to ignore their message. The Dims set the message. Their propagandists promulgate it. And the pubbies constantly react to it. Rather than react they should change the subject to what they want to talk about. When the media objects call them what they are, propagandists for the dims. This should be the standard message from the pubbies. And be ready with examples, because they will be asking in an attempt to discredit the pubbie calling them to task. The next thing is to support media outlets that tell the truth, like The Blaze for example. Another thing we can do is band together and buy media outlets. Then we can get the truth out via that outlet. It would be a start. Start a constitutional convention movement.

Yes, I’d say that is a start, but it will take courage. As this discussion on FR this morning shows... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3069414/posts ...Number 5 will be problematic. A propaganda vs. truth war is always messy. But, it truly is the first step to restoring our freedom.

17
posted on 09/21/2013 8:41:36 AM PDT
by EBH
( Freeman: A person not in slavery or serfdom.)

So I return to my question that started this post and rephrase it. What is a Freeman to do to restore their Right to Freedom of the Press, crush the propaganda, and destroy the censorship that is big media today? A Freeman exercising his Rights of Speech and Press is big medias and the governments biggest fear. A Freemans Press that finds a way to circumvent their controls over the message, speech, and education of the public will be the Presss downfall.

We must find a way to break the hold of information censorship the media and government holds before 2016. If the Patriots prior to 1776 could find a way, we owe it to them, ourselves, and our children to find a way today.

The founding generation won our independence from the tyrannical superpower of their day using handwritten letters delivered by men on horseback, and relatively crude printing presses.

Agreed. I am going to approach my local reps about starting the constitutional convention rolling. We will need a good slogan. Something like Restore Freedom. When the propagandists approach us we can fight back with a vengeance. This activity will set the national discussion for a long time...if we can get the boilers fired.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.